Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a small trader, filed an appeal with a delay of 156 days before the CIT(A) and 1 day before the Tribunal. The delays were attributed to medical reasons, illiteracy, and communication issues with the previous auditor, and the ex-parte assessment under Section 144.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 156 days before the CIT(A) and 1 day before the Tribunal, considering the medical reasons and the ex-parte assessment without proper opportunity. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for de novo assessment.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned on medical grounds and due to lack of proper opportunity during ex-parte assessment.
Sections Cited
144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE
Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY
PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi vide order dated 21/02/2025 in DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1073579581(1) for the assessment year 2016-17.
The assessee has filed applications seeking condonation of (i) delay of 156 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and (ii) delay of 1 day in filing the appeal before the Tribunal.
The appeal before the Tribunal has been filed with a delay of 1 day. The assessee has explained that the delay was due to medical reasons and has submitted a medical certificate issued by the doctor evidencing the treatment taken around the time of filing the appeal.
Considering the marginal delay of a single day and the medical ground supported by documents, we are of the view that the delay deserves to be condoned. Accordingly, the delay of 1 day in filing the appeal before the Tribunal is condoned.
Condonation of delay before the ld. CIT(A)/ NFAC:
We have carefully considered the assessee’s application and supporting affidavit. The assessee is a small trader dealing in fertilizers, seeds, and pesticides, primarily on a cash basis. He is illiterate and not conversant with electronic communication. It is stated that the income tax return and compliance were entrusted to the previous auditor, and the assessee had a bona fide belief that his return was filed and notices, if any, were responded to.
6.1 The assessee claims to have never personally received the notices or assessment order, which were sent to the email ID of the previous auditor. Due to illness and lack of communication, the assessee could not obtain timely information and documents from the previous auditor. Accordingly, the appeal was filed after a delay of 156 days. The explanation is supported by medical evidence and factual details, including the consistent pattern of filing returns in prior years and the absence of willful default.
6.2 Considering the facts, the background of the assessee, and the principle of substantial justice, we are satisfied that the cause of delay was bona fide and beyond the assessee’s control. Hence, the delay of 156 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) is also condoned.
6.3 We further note that the assessment has been framed ex-parte under section 144 of the Act. No proper opportunity appears to have been granted to the assessee. Given the assessee’s background, circumstances explained, and in the interest of justice, we are of the view that the matter should be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside, and the matter is restored to the AO with a direction to frame the assessment afresh after giving due opportunity to the assessee to furnish necessary documents and explanations. Hence, the delays before the ld. CIT(A) and the Tribunal stand condoned, and the matter is remanded to the AO for de novo assessment. Hence, the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in court on 11th day of August, 2025